GirlChat #451134


Born Pedo

Posted by Dante on 2008-September-08 23:30:33 EDT, Monday
In reply to Let's play Dante! posted by Marutoph on 2008-September-08 03:57:27 EDT, Monday

  Views: 0    Likes: 0     
To say 'I was born a pedo' is an assumption. Not an educated assumption either. You understand little about sexuality if you're willing to make deferences to nature so authoritatively like this, overlooking nurture and individual complexity.

Correct. There are other factors; otherwise all those Ancient Athenian who share the same genome as ours wouldn't have been so predominantly BLers.

But what I meant is that it isn't a choice, as you would have us believe. The notion of Sexual Preference, as opposed to Sexual Orientation, would have us believe that there's a voluntary aspect to ones attractions.

Since you're so in love with the APA, let's see what they have to say about the "choice" to be a Pedophile.

Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?

No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. For most people, sexual orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.


The Nature Vs. Nurture debate is still open. And no one can decidedly say what causes a Sexual Orientation, only that like inborn qualities rather than learned traits, our Orientation is not volitional.

To argue otherwise flies in the face of what we know.

campaigns are not objects, so you don't see them.

Gads, you can be obstinate in your literalism.

See: discern or deduce mentally after reflection or from information; understand.

As in, you "look" but you don't "see."

People here twist words into rare definitions, have people using them, and then they get in trouble for it.

Some do. Whereas others use the most common definitions while still being able to admit that others exist.

Software isn't an issue. Security isn't an issue.

WTF?! I must vehemently disagree.

It's great that a lot of people see the need to be protective. Others don't. They are naive, and are being punished for their trust in humanity.


I'm all for doing everything I can to try to protect the naive. But short of closing up shop or ceasing to register new posters; we can't reduce the risk to zero.

I can only think that this negligence reflects a lack of concern or even a desire for attention to be shifted towards new ignorant posters who are baited onto this board from other less notable areas of the internet.

Short of kicking folks off the board for their own good I believe that GC extends every effort it can. Your Mods work without pay to keep compromising materiel off the board. The admin work to keep us up with a system which has the least ability to be used for ill of any known to us. And all newbies are greeted with a request to read the security info in the FAQ and to follow the Seven Rules for posting.

Your suggestion that this constitutes negligence towards their safety and that we are engaged in "baiting" "human sheilds" is an insult to all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think that the best words about Naivete are from Philip K Dick's afterward to A Scanner Darkly.

"This has been a novel about some people who were punished entirely too much for what they did. They wanted to have a good time, but they were like children playing in the street; they could see one after another of them being killed--run over, maimed, destroyed--but they continued to play anyhow. We really all were very happy for a while, sitting around not toiling but just bullshitting and playing, but it was for such a terrible brief time, and then the punishment was beyond belief: even when we could see it, we could not believe it. For example, while I was writing this I learned that the person on whom the character Jerry Fabin is based killed himself. My friend on whom I based the character Ernie Luckman died before I began the novel. For a while I myself was one of these children playing in the street; I was, like the rest of them, trying to play instead of being grown up, and I was punished. I am on the list below, which is a list of those to whom this novel is dedicated, and what became of each.

Drug misuse is not a disease, it is a decision, like the decision to step out in front of a moving car. You would call that not a disease but an error in judgment. When a bunch of people begin to do it, it is a social error,a life-style. In this particular life-style the motto is "Be happy now because tomorrow you are dying," but the dying begins almost at once, and the happiness is a memory. It is, then, only a speeding up, an intensifying, of the ordinary human existence. It is not different from your life-style, it is only faster. It all takes place in days or weeks or months instead of years. "Take the cash and let the credit go," as Villon said in 1460. But that is a mistake if the cash is a penny and the credit a whole lifetime.

There is no moral in this novel; it is not bourgeois; it does not say they were wrong to play when they should have toiled;it just tells what the consequences were. In Greek drama they were beginning, as a society, to discover science, which means causal law. Here in this novel there is Nemesis: not fate, because any one of us could have chosen to stop playing in the street, but, as I narrate from the deepest part of my life and heart, a dreadful Nemesis for those who kept on playing. I myself,I am not a character in this novel; I am the novel. So, though, was our entire nation at this time. This novel is about more people than I knew personally. Some we all read about in the newspapers. It was, this sitting around with our buddies and bullshitting while making tape recordings, the bad decision of the decade, the sixties, both in and out of the establishment. And nature cracked down on us. We were forced to stop by things dreadful.

If there was any "sin," it was that these people wanted to keep on having a good time forever, and were punished for that, but, as I say, I feel that, if so, the punishment was far too great, and I prefer to think of it only in a Greek or morally neutral way, as mere science, as deterministic impartial cause-and-effect. I loved them all.

In Memoriam. These were comrades whom I had; there are no better. They remain in my mind, and the enemy will never be forgiven. The "enemy" was their mistake in playing.
Let them all play again, in some other way, and let them be happy."


Those who are naive, and are being punished for their trust in humanity are like those we wish to warn about their errors in judgement, and the consequences thereof. But the warning itself doesn't make the one doing the warning responsible for those who can't believe that anything bad could ever befall them.

All it makes us is sad witnesses to the consequences of actions we advised against.

Dante

Dante


This post is archived, preventing any new replies.

Responses